Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-04-19

lating its provisions. A careful read
ing of the "act 10 regulate
commerce" under which this commits
sisn is organized, will show to the petit
TONERS and others who have made
similar applications that no jurisdiction
has been given us 10 answer ques-
tions like those under considera-
ton. An expression of our opinion
upon these subjects, at this time being
neither duty imposed nor power con-
lerred by statute, would carry with 1T
10 jndicial efficacy or sanction in fact,
would be nomore useful to the public or
carriers than the opinion OF other men
upon the same points. Two sections
Of the law confer power upon the com
mission to entertain and decide apph-
cations and petitions.
Section 4 empowers MS. upon appll-
cation by common carrier, TO author,
ize silch common carrier, in special
cases, to charge less for longer than
for shorter distances over the same line,
and also TO prescribe the extent OF
relief from the operation OF the
former part of the same section
which designated common car
rier may from time to time en-
10Y. A large number of petitions
have been filed under this section, the
consideration of which is at this time
engaging the attention of the commits
sion, and nothing said in this opinion IS
TO be treated as in any manner bearing
thereon. Itisobvious that applications
like those of the railway conductors
and Traders and Travellers Union have
10 relation whatever to the duties I'M
posed upon MS by section 4, and this is
The only section of the law which the
commission has power to suspend or re-
lax.
Section - authorizes complaints to
the commission and confers jurisdic-
ton to entertain the same. Itproyides
that any person, &C., complaining OF
anything done, or omitted to be done,
by any common carrier subject to the
provisions of this act in contravention
OF the provisions thereof, may apply to
said commission by petition, which
shall briefly state facts, notice and OPP
portumty for answer having been
given. Unless satisfaction is made an
investigation is required. Upon such
an investigation the commission will
necessarily entertain the consideration
Of the question whether the conduct
complained Of is or is not in contrayen
ton of the provisions Of the law, and
if it so adjudges it is authorized
to issue notice enjoining the car
ncr from further violation of the
law and demand reparetion for
injury done or both, but neither the
railway conductors nor the Traders
and Travellers Union complain that
ANY common carrier has violated the
law. On the contrary, they both aver
that the railroad companies do not now
violate the law and do not wish
to 90 50. The conductors say
hat they fear they will not re-
cCiye passes as heretofore and the
.radcrs and travellers say that they
err commercial travellers will not
lc allowed free transportation for $50
pounds Of extra baggage, as wasallowed
fast year. They present no complaint
of anything done or omitted in contra
yention of the provisions of the law. If
railroad company shonld Issue pass
to a conductor and his family TO attend
m approaching convention, or should
transport 800 pounds of baggage free
for q commercial traveller under the
registry and indemnity system,
and some person feeling aggrieved
should make complaint of unjust dis
elimination, it would then be proper for
The commission to entertain the ques-
ton of whether such conduct was or
was not in violation of tue law, and if
go whether il was or was not within the
exceptions stated within section D.
Complaints may also be presented if
the charges made by carriers are not
considered reasonable or just. But I'M
Ill questions of this kind come before
us IN a way clearly indicated by the
statute it would be worse than useless
ior us to express opinions or give adj
vice. We should not only lay our
selves Justly open to the charge of as
suming unwarranted authority, but
should also run great risk OF involving
all concerned i'll what the courts might
afterwards hold TO be breaches OF law
by has,y and ll-considered conclusions
based upon cr-pdTte statements and
arguments, although it might be de-
stable, or at least convenient, III re-
spect to any piece of new legislation to
have a tribunal established to which
inquirers might apply for Instructions
and advice respecting the meaning OF
the law and its application to suggested
circumstances and conditions" A
moments reflection will show that no
such tribunal could be properly erected.
Congress has not taken the manage
ment of railroads out OF the hands of
railroad companies. II has simply es-
iablished certain principles under which
intcr-S State commerce must be con-
Quoted.
1t has been enacted in section that
oil charges for interstate transporta-
ton shall be reasonable and just has
prohibited in section all manner OF
unjust discrimination has forbidden
in section 3 all undue and unreasona-
bic preferences and advantages; has
required in the same section reasona-
be and equal facilities for the inter
change OF traffic and has prohibited
in section 3 the pooling of freights.
That, in substance, is the interstate
commerce law. There is nothing novel
in these provisions they simply
bring back the business of common
carriers to well-settled principles
OF common law. Yet no one
can deny that there was urgent need
If their statutory formulation. The
alleged difficulties in putting them in
operation only disclose examples Of the
extent to which they have been violated
in the past. These sections of the act
are expressed in plain words. A con-
stIuction must be given them, in the
first instance, by carriers and their
patrons. When a course OF conduct
has been adopted OF which complaint
is made that 1t violates the Law, the de-
cision of the question will rest with the
courts or with the commission, rs the
complaining party may elect. This is
the orderly method in which all legis-
lation is administered and applied, aud
the statute in question presents no ex-
ceptiOn.
One more suggestion may properly
be added. 1t appears from numerous
DetitiOns that have been laid before us